It was assumed the destructor of notmuch_rb_database_type did return a
notmuch_status_t because that's what notmuch_database_close returns, and
that value was checked by notmuch_rb_database_close in order to decide
if to raise an exception.
It turns out notmuch_database_destroy was called
Mirrors the C API: 7864350c (Split notmuch_database_close into two
functions, 2012-04-25).
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
bindings/ruby/database.c | 19 ++-
bindings/ruby/defs.h | 3 +++
bindings/ruby/init.c | 1 +
3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Sychronize with notmuch API, where notmuch_database_close is different
from notmuch_database_destroy. At least since a long time ago.
Felipe Contreras (2):
ruby: split database close and destroy
ruby: cleanup object_destroy()
bindings/ruby/database.c | 19 ++-
A let binding without a value is just an obfuscated way of saying
nil, especially if you are not going to mutate the variable.
---
emacs/notmuch-tree.el | 7 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-tree.el b/emacs/notmuch-tree.el
index
This fixes an a warning from the byte-compiler. The commit
74ab62a34018b38a40db4d363fff3faae964b47a changed the function
signature but did not update the declaration.
---
emacs/notmuch-hello.el | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-hello.el
This error crept in during my style rewrite of dkg's proposed change.
---
emacs/notmuch-crypto.el | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-crypto.el b/emacs/notmuch-crypto.el
index 5edfe94c..de4d9aea 100644
--- a/emacs/notmuch-crypto.el
+++
I left the reference to freenode in the test suite data, since it is
historical.
---
.travis.yml | 2 +-
README | 2 +-
doc/man1/notmuch.rst | 2 +-
3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/.travis.yml b/.travis.yml
index 9dcec1ff..5bb03de6 100644
---
David Bremner writes:
> This is not finished/correct yet, but maybe it will save someone else
> some debugging.
>
> [PATCH 2/3] emacs: don't inline message/rfc822 parts without content
>
I have confirmed that thanks to larsi's quick fix, patch 2/3 alone makes
things copacetic in emacs master. I
David Bremner writes:
> That makes sense to me, with the (perhaps obvious) caveat that calling
> without binding the setup function should cleanly do the display
> (perhaps with less fontification) and return.
Yup. I've now done the refactoring, so there should be no user-visible
changes for
Lars Ingebrigtsen writes:
> But perhaps the function should be rewritten to call a (say)
> `mm-inline-message-setup-function', bound by the caller? Then both Gnus
> and notmuch could use the function.
That makes sense to me, with the (perhaps obvious) caveat that calling
without binding the
10 matches
Mail list logo
